Friend of a friend is telling us a pretty crazy story: apparently his wife stole his three-month-old Audi (not paid off) and a bunch of his expensive camera gear and drove off to a different state. She promptly totaled the car and insurance won't pay for it because she rear-ended another car that stopped for an emergency vehicle. So here he's got a wife in Denver with a totaled car demanding that he pay off the rest of it so she can have it, or else she'll leave it on the side of the road so that it gets impounded and he gets stuck with the impound fees because the car is registered to him.I call shenanigans because it just plain sounds ridiculous, but he insists that he couldn't report his car stolen because he married his wife before he bought the car, thus meaning that despite the fact that she hasn't put a dollar toward it and it's not in her name, she's entitled to it just as much as he is. Same with the camera gear and all the other stuff - since he bought it after he married her, she's entitled to it as well. That can't possibly be the law! Amirite?

sprezzatura wrote:Friend of a friend is telling us a pretty crazy story: apparently his wife stole his three-month-old Audi (not paid off) and a bunch of his expensive camera gear and drove off to a different state. She promptly totaled the car and insurance won't pay for it because she rear-ended another car that stopped for an emergency vehicle. So here he's got a wife in Denver with a totaled car demanding that he pay off the rest of it so she can have it, or else she'll leave it on the side of the road so that it gets impounded and he gets stuck with the impound fees because the car is registered to him.I call shenanigans because it just plain sounds ridiculous, but he insists that he couldn't report his car stolen because he married his wife before he bought the car, thus meaning that despite the fact that she hasn't put a dollar toward it and it's not in her name, she's entitled to it just as much as he is. Same with the camera gear and all the other stuff - since he bought it after he married her, she's entitled to it as well. That can't possibly be the law! Amirite?

While it may be true that certain states do have a community property doctrine, there are a number of states that still follow the common law doctrine that does not recognize community property. As an illustration, in a state that does not follow the community property doctrine, the widow or widower has a right to a forced share in the estate even if the deceased spouse did not leave anything to the widow or widower.

helfer snooterbagon wrote:While it may be true that certain states do have a community property doctrine, there are a number of states that still follow the common law doctrine that does not recognize community property. As an illustration, in a state that does not follow the community property doctrine, the widow or widower has a right to a forced share in the estate even if the deceased spouse did not leave anything to the widow or widower.

Someone's been too busy reading a property treatise to pay attention in this thread. Both spouses are alive, so what a widower could do about said car is hardly germane. Unless you're suggesting he kill her....

helfer snooterbagon wrote:While it may be true that certain states do have a community property doctrine, there are a number of states that still follow the common law doctrine that does not recognize community property. As an illustration, in a state that does not follow the community property doctrine, the widow or widower has a right to a forced share in the estate even if the deceased spouse did not leave anything to the widow or widower.

Someone's been too busy reading a property treatise to pay attention in this thread. Both spouses are alive, so what a widower could do about said car is hardly germane. Unless you're suggesting he kill her....

Or perhaps, asshole, I was pointing out that the argument about community property might not be germane.

helfer snooterbagon wrote:While it may be true that certain states do have a community property doctrine, there are a number of states that still follow the common law doctrine that does not recognize community property. As an illustration, in a state that does not follow the community property doctrine, the widow or widower has a right to a forced share in the estate even if the deceased spouse did not leave anything to the widow or widower.

Someone's been too busy reading a property treatise to pay attention in this thread. Both spouses are alive, so what a widower could do about said car is hardly germane. Unless you're suggesting he kill her....

Or perhaps, asshole, I was pointing out that the argument about community property might not be germane.

Hey there, no need to resort to name-calling just yet. If you're trying to pick a pedantic fight, you should have called someone out on "community property" vs. "common property" or "joint property." But if you were just trying to show off how much you learned from the property E&E, at least try and make it look on-point (it's good practice for exams).

helfer snooterbagon wrote:While it may be true that certain states do have a community property doctrine, there are a number of states that still follow the common law doctrine that does not recognize community property. As an illustration, in a state that does not follow the community property doctrine, the widow or widower has a right to a forced share in the estate even if the deceased spouse did not leave anything to the widow or widower.

Someone's been too busy reading a property treatise to pay attention in this thread. Both spouses are alive, so what a widower could do about said car is hardly germane. Unless you're suggesting he kill her....

Or perhaps, asshole, I was pointing out that the argument about community property might not be germane.

Hey there, no need to resort to name-calling just yet. If you're trying to pick a pedantic fight, you should have called someone out on "community property" vs. "common property" or "joint property." But if you were just trying to show off how much you learned from the property E&E, at least try and make it look on-point (it's good practice for exams).

+1. helfer snooterbagon's attempt to sound intelligent was sad. When I first mentioned community property, I thought we were all adult/aware enough to understand that there are exceptions without my having to list 4 different ways a minority of states might do something. Also, even in non-community property states, I doubt a husband could buy a car and the wife not have any right to it.